D.A. Denies Claims of Favoritism

Orange County Dist. Atty. Tony Rackauckas went on the offensive Monday against a grand jury report accusing him of favoritism and helping campaign donors, dismissing the study as baseless and one-sided.

Rackauckas said the investigation was orchestrated by disgruntled prosecutors who backed his rival in the last two elections.

“The grand jury received a somewhat one-sided view of recent history, apparently a view promulgated by opponents of the changes this administration brought,” Rackauckas said in his 153-page response. “It does not appear coincidental that the complaints that prompted the inquiry were made just months before the March 2002 district attorney election.”

A grand jury spent eight months investigating an assortment of allegations against Rackauckas after three of his top prosecutors complained to the state attorney general’s office. In June, the panel accused Rackauckas of punishing his enemies with reassignments and early retirement offers while rewarding friends and political backers with jobs or by meddling in cases on their behalf.

The grand jury provided 64 recommendations, including that Rackauckas be barred from selecting new attorneys for the office. Rackauckas said he rejected 30 of the recommendations and that the remainder had been initiated before the report came out.

The report claimed that Don Blankenship, the chief of investigations for the office, double-billed the office thousands of dollars for meals and drinks with colleagues, lobbyists and reporters.

Rackauckas said his office investigated the accusations and found that overpayments to Blankenship totaled $209.45, which he has repaid.

He also denied a contention of the grand jury that his wife, Kay, a deputy prosecutor, held great influence over office policies.

“Ms. Rackauckas was neither given nor permitted a greater level of authority and influence than is characteristic of her job description,” he wrote.

Rackauckas, who testified before the grand jury for two days in March, said the report “simply lacked merit” and he “wholly disagreed” with the majority of its 92 findings.

He argued that witnesses with information that might have countered the allegations were never called to testify, leading to what he called an unbalanced and unfair account of his administration.

Rackauckas defended his record of four years in office, focusing on the drop in violent crime and the dramatic improvement in child-support cases.

He also declared that office morale is good, saying reports to the contrary have been propelled by “a small but vocal minority with their own political and personal agenda.”

Rackauckas’ arguments echo comments he made when the grand jury report was released. Whenever a grand jury files a report about a county agency, by law the agency must file a formal response within 30 days.

Rackauckas, a former judge who was first elected as the county’s top prosecutor in 1998 and then again two years ago, continues to blame the investigation on leftovers from the previous administration who supported the campaign of former Deputy Dist. Atty. Wally Wade, whom he faced in both elections.

“When, as a result of an election, a new leader is selected, and a new course charted, anger and outright opposition from within this entrenched group may ensue,” Rackauckas said in his rebuttal.

Wade said Monday that the grand jury is an experienced, independent body with no political agendas.

He took issue with Rackauckas’ spin of its conclusions.

“What he’s basically saying is that the grand jury violated its oath, and that the attorney general of the state of California helped them violate their oath,” Wade said.

In a related matter, lawyers for Rackauckas and the county are asking the attorney general to hand over confidential information from the grand jury investigation, arguing they need the records to defend a wrongful termination lawsuit filed by former Assistant Dist. Atty. Michael Jacobs.

Jacobs was one of the prosecutors who met with the attorney general’s office last winter to raise the allegations of misconduct against Rackauckas.

He alleges in his lawsuit that he was fired for reporting the abuse of public resources and political cronyism within the D.A.’s office.

Senior Assistant Atty. Gen. Gary Schons, who works in the San Diego office that handled the case, declined to comment.